S SENTHAMARAI Vs. TAMILNADU HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to challenge an order of the second respondent, i.e., Executive Engineer-cum-Administrative Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Besant Nagar Division, Chennai, dated 12.7.2012 and after setting aside the same, seeks for a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to execute the sale deed in respect of the property in MIG Flat No.M.14/7 (Ground Floor), Besant Nagar, Phase-I Scheme, Chennai in the joint name of the petitioner and the third respondent with necessary recitals protecting the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the property.

(2.) WHEN the matter came up on 26.7.2012, this court directed notice to be served on Mr.R.Jeyaseelan, learned Standing Counsel for the TNHB. After taking notice, the learned counsel produced a written instructions from the second respondent, dated 27.7.2012. Since this court is not inclined to admit the writ petition, no notice was served on the third respondent who is the husband of the petitioner.

(3.) THE case of the petitioner was that she was working as a Record Clerk in the Directorate of Municipal Administration. She had applied for allotment of a flat when applications were called for by the first respondent. She was allotted a flat in M.14/7, Ground Floor, Phase-I, known as Nava Bharat Nagar. In terms of the allotment, she had paid Rs.6000/- as an initial payment on 10.10.1984. The third respondent is the husband of the petitioner. He was employed as an Assistant in the Food Corporation of India. In order to get housing loan and as suggested by the third respondent, she had requested the first respondent to transfer the allotment in the name of the third respondent. This was with a view to enable the third respondent to get housing loan from his employer, so that an outright purchase of the property can be made. The petitioner came to know that the third respondent was not faithful to her and was having an illicit intimacy with an another person and also was starting to live separately. Fearing that he may throw out her, she sent a representation dated 17.2.1995 to the first respondent seeking for re-transfer of the flat in the name of the petitioner.